The Paradoxical Effect of Praise and Blame: Age-Related Differences

Kaspar, Kai; Stelz, Helena

doi:10.5964/ejop.v9i2.540

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In reaction to this, Groeben and Blickle (1992) asserted that the study by suffered from methodological problems. Reisenzein and Battmann (1992) in turn rejected this criticism and pointed out that no independent data supporting Groeben and Blickle's model existed. Finally, Blickle (1993) softened the strict distinction between the attributional and language-psychological model by partially merging them (p. 45).…”

Section: Language-psychological Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Paradoxical Effect of Praise and Blame: Age-Related Differences

Kaspar¹,

Stelz²

2013

PsycEXTRA Dataset

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blame and praise sometimes have a seemingly paradoxical effect: blame after failure sometimes leads to the impression that the recipient has a high ability. In contrast, praise after success can lead to an inference of low ability. Several studies showed this effect and its relation to concurrent sympathy ratings as well as to cognitive schemas underlying these estimations. The present study is the first to focus on differences across the adult lifespan regarding peoples' ability and sympathy estimations of praised or blamed individuals. In this context, the causal schemas underlying peoples' judgments were also investigated. The results show that seemingly paradoxical ability estimations were independent of age in contrast to reversed ability estimations (i.e., a praised individual is perceived as more capable than a blamed individual) decreasing with age. Moreover, age affected the estimation of a teacher's sympathy for blamed and praised students in terms of a universal decrease with age. Finally, exclusive ability-related causal schemas were primarily used by older people and facilitated the occurrence of seemingly paradoxical ability estimations. The results provide a first base for future research on this largely neglected topic.

show abstract

Section: Language-psychological Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%